Sources of Islamic Theories of Reproduction: Difference between revisions

==Other apologetic claims==

Apologists sometimes use other arguments to find a reference to sperm (not just semen) or the female ovum in the Qur’an. These are described below as well as responses from critics. Qur’an translations are Sahih International’s.

The apologist Osama Abdullah makes the following claim about the word nutfah in an attempt to make it sound like a single sperm:

The first line is the apologist's generalization based on the second line, which is his attempted translation of a definition in the Lisan al-Arab dictionary of classical Arabic.<ref>[http://www.baheth.info/all.jsp?term=%D9%86%D8%B7%D9%81 Lisan Al-Arab dictionary, Book 5, Pages 725]</ref>

Critics note that the quotation has been truncated, mistranslated, and is of the definition for the wrong word (na<U>t</U>af – pearls or earrings), which has the same n-t-f root as nu<U>t</U>fah.

Abdallah's claim has been copied on other Islamic websites, one even attempting to evolve the claim further by suggesting that this 'mistaken' generalization actually appears in the Lisan al-Arab definition. Lisan al-Arab’s actual definition of nu<U>t</U>fah is a little amount (qalil, قليل) of water (see beginning of this article). Critics note that even supposing that nu<U>t</U>fah had meant a single drop, a sperm is a discrete object from among many of the same discrete objects, unlike a drop of fluid, which is an amount of something from a larger amount.

At the same time, various difficulties and problems may be observed in their theory. {{Quran-range|37|7|9}} provides context to verses that mention dust before other stages. It clarifies that the first man was created from dust, and his progeny from "liquid disdained" (a synonym for nutfah, as discussed in this article). The authors try to explain "disdained" here by appealing to an obscure and certainly metaphorical mid 7th century Syriac passage on baptismal theology which compares the race of Adam to water polluted by the devil. <ref>Ibid. p. 101, pp. 154-161</ref> As argued elsewhere in this article, another passage, {{Quran-range|77|20|22}} mentions liquid disdained placed in a firm lodging (similar to {{Quran|23|13}} which instead uses the word nutfah), and is easily understood as semen placed in the womb in line with Greek and Talmudic concepts. Eich and Dorotei interpret the "firm lodging" as a prominent fixed place and attempt a connection with the creation story, though their evidence may seem very thin here.<ref>Ibid. pp. 156-61</ref> Some may also find it hard to see how the disdained liquid being placed there for a known extent/determination in {{Quran|77|22}} sounds like the creation of Adam more than gestation in the womb.

Eich and Doroftei present virtually no positive evidence that the nutfah and later stages were ever interpreted by early Muslims as descriptions of Adam's creation (nor would this be expected if they are correct that the Quran had already been edited to reframe the meaning to a pre-natal context). Nevertheless, even if they are correct that Q. 23:14 and some other verses were edited or interpolated to reframe the original context of nutfah, alaqah, and mudghah, the Quran as we have it ''today'' certainly uses these terms with a pre-natal meaning in at least some passages, reflecting the influence of pre-scientific contemporary beliefs which are also apparent to an even greater extent in hadiths, as demonstrated in this article.